“As-You-Go” instead of “After-the-Fact”

A network approach to scholarly communication and evaluation

C.H.J. Hartgerink, J.M. van Zelst

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

36 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Scholarly research faces threats to its sustainability on multiple domains (access, incentives, reproducibility, inclusivity). We argue that “after-the-fact” research papers do not help and actually cause some of these threats because the chronology of the research cycle is lost in a research paper. We propose to give up the academic paper and propose a digitally native “as-you-go” alternative. In this design, modules of research outputs are communicated along the way and are directly linked to each other to form a network of outputs that can facilitate research evaluation. This embeds chronology in the design of scholarly communication and facilitates the recognition of more diverse outputs that go beyond the paper (e.g., code, materials). Moreover, using network analysis to investigate the relations between linked outputs could help align evaluation tools with evaluation questions. We illustrate how such a modular “as-you-go” design of scholarly communication could be structured and how network indicators could be computed to assist in the evaluation process, with specific use cases for funders, universities, and individual researchers.
Original languageEnglish
Article number21
Number of pages10
JournalPublications
Volume6
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

communication
Communication
evaluation
threat
evaluation research
network analysis
Electric network analysis
incentive
sustainability
Evaluation
Sustainable development
cause
university
Chronology
Threat
Research evaluation
Incentives
Research output
Sustainability
Module

Keywords

  • evaluation
  • network
  • communication
  • paper
  • metaresearch
  • decentralization
  • decentralisation
  • publishing

Cite this

@article{1199af25d52c421ca7197ea7f56ce5ab,
title = "“As-You-Go” instead of “After-the-Fact”: A network approach to scholarly communication and evaluation",
abstract = "Scholarly research faces threats to its sustainability on multiple domains (access, incentives, reproducibility, inclusivity). We argue that “after-the-fact” research papers do not help and actually cause some of these threats because the chronology of the research cycle is lost in a research paper. We propose to give up the academic paper and propose a digitally native “as-you-go” alternative. In this design, modules of research outputs are communicated along the way and are directly linked to each other to form a network of outputs that can facilitate research evaluation. This embeds chronology in the design of scholarly communication and facilitates the recognition of more diverse outputs that go beyond the paper (e.g., code, materials). Moreover, using network analysis to investigate the relations between linked outputs could help align evaluation tools with evaluation questions. We illustrate how such a modular “as-you-go” design of scholarly communication could be structured and how network indicators could be computed to assist in the evaluation process, with specific use cases for funders, universities, and individual researchers.",
keywords = "evaluation, network, communication, paper, metaresearch, decentralization, decentralisation, publishing",
author = "C.H.J. Hartgerink and {van Zelst}, J.M.",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.3390/publications6020021",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
journal = "Publications",
issn = "2304-6775",
publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
number = "2",

}

“As-You-Go” instead of “After-the-Fact” : A network approach to scholarly communication and evaluation. / Hartgerink, C.H.J.; van Zelst, J.M.

In: Publications, Vol. 6, No. 2, 21, 2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - “As-You-Go” instead of “After-the-Fact”

T2 - A network approach to scholarly communication and evaluation

AU - Hartgerink, C.H.J.

AU - van Zelst, J.M.

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Scholarly research faces threats to its sustainability on multiple domains (access, incentives, reproducibility, inclusivity). We argue that “after-the-fact” research papers do not help and actually cause some of these threats because the chronology of the research cycle is lost in a research paper. We propose to give up the academic paper and propose a digitally native “as-you-go” alternative. In this design, modules of research outputs are communicated along the way and are directly linked to each other to form a network of outputs that can facilitate research evaluation. This embeds chronology in the design of scholarly communication and facilitates the recognition of more diverse outputs that go beyond the paper (e.g., code, materials). Moreover, using network analysis to investigate the relations between linked outputs could help align evaluation tools with evaluation questions. We illustrate how such a modular “as-you-go” design of scholarly communication could be structured and how network indicators could be computed to assist in the evaluation process, with specific use cases for funders, universities, and individual researchers.

AB - Scholarly research faces threats to its sustainability on multiple domains (access, incentives, reproducibility, inclusivity). We argue that “after-the-fact” research papers do not help and actually cause some of these threats because the chronology of the research cycle is lost in a research paper. We propose to give up the academic paper and propose a digitally native “as-you-go” alternative. In this design, modules of research outputs are communicated along the way and are directly linked to each other to form a network of outputs that can facilitate research evaluation. This embeds chronology in the design of scholarly communication and facilitates the recognition of more diverse outputs that go beyond the paper (e.g., code, materials). Moreover, using network analysis to investigate the relations between linked outputs could help align evaluation tools with evaluation questions. We illustrate how such a modular “as-you-go” design of scholarly communication could be structured and how network indicators could be computed to assist in the evaluation process, with specific use cases for funders, universities, and individual researchers.

KW - evaluation

KW - network

KW - communication

KW - paper

KW - metaresearch

KW - decentralization

KW - decentralisation

KW - publishing

U2 - 10.3390/publications6020021

DO - 10.3390/publications6020021

M3 - Article

VL - 6

JO - Publications

JF - Publications

SN - 2304-6775

IS - 2

M1 - 21

ER -